Incumbency delivers many benefits for political parties as they approach elections, not least of which is running advertising campaigns on the public tab. Take, for example, the Moving Victoria campaign promoting the Napthine government’s transport vision splendid.

As these ads flood our screens, airwaves and print, there might be an understandable tendency to collectively shrug our shoulders, for this is just what happens, isn’t it? Both sides of politics do it, right? That’s true. But lately, those Moving Victoria ads are getting me angry.

We – the taxpayers of Victoria – are paying for ads that clearly have a political objective.

No matter how much the campaign is rationalised as educating the public about new policies, the true intent is to win over voters, and revive the election prospects of a government that is behind in the polls. We are all aboard Denis Napthine’s election express.

‘Better Public Transport. Better Roads.’ That ordering of ideas is critical.

The first thing to be said about the Moving Victoria campaign is that, when viewed in terms of persuasion, it is a smart piece of work. For those who have been around long enough, the title could have drawn inspiration from the slogan that defined the Kennett government, and one that made it on to our number plates: Victoria: on the move.

Advertisement

The Kennett era was defined by the concept of reviving the state’s fortunes; it was a government seen to be doing things – even if they weren’t all popular. Contrast the inertia of the first three years of this Coalition government, in which Victoria was barely moving.

The last year has been all about trying to kickstart the government, and for the Coalition, that has meant getting back on track – and on bitumen – with a transport vision. Its initial plan to build the contentious East West Link led to the portrayal of the government as being all about roads while ignoring public transport. The May state budget sought to rebalance the perception by committing – scheduled to start in 2016 – to the Melbourne Rail Link, including that pipe dream since the 1960s, a rail link to the airport. So the Moving Victoria slogan has a secondary line: ‘‘Better Public Transport. Better Roads.’’ That ordering of ideas is critical.

Throw into the mix policies such as level crossing removals and protective service officers on train stations, and the transport narrative is potentially a strong one for the government.

It is not the merits or otherwise of these policies that concern me here. Rather, it is that we – the taxpayers of Victoria – are paying for ads that clearly have a political objective.

In opposition, then Liberal leader Ted Baillieu railed against Labor using public money to ‘‘shamelessly’’ promote itself. (And for what it’s worth, Labor’s ads also riled me.) The Coalition promised oversight by a five-member independent panel, headed by a retired judge. That has morphed in a three-member group within the Premier’s Department, headed by a former Howard government bureaucrat.

Even with election promises losing currency of late, the state Coalition has clearly retreated from its strident cries of ‘‘shame’’ while on the opposition benches. Tempted by having the resources of government at their disposal, the opportunity has been too good to pass up. What’s a little policy backdown here and there? And four years is a long time ago.

A transport department spokesman describes the Moving Victoria ads as a ‘‘public information campaign’’ – and at one level, that can be argued, for they do include public information. But they also clearly serve another purpose – persuasion of voters only months out from the November state election.

And, of course, we are paying for it.

I thought it would be useful to find out how much was being spent. It seemed like a reasonable question, and I would love to have provided a figure because, after all, this is public money, our money.

But my request was denied. I would have to wait until the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure delivers its annual report to Parliament towards the end of the last parliamentary sitting before the election. And in December – after the election – there would also be the Victorian government’s annual report on its advertising.

That was a disappointing response to a simple question.

Given the Coalition’s hands are now dirty, here’s the challenge for the Labor Party. Make a clear, strong commitment not to repeat its poor behaviour of the past. Rather, declare that a future Labor government will not use public money for political advertising.

In the meantime, we will continue to be inundated with the Moving Victoria message, with its faint echo of the Kennett years. And I’ll continue to get angry. It’s our money, and I wish I knew how much.

Shane Green is a contributing editor of The Age.

70 comments so far

Governments spending my money on what is really political advertising makes me so angry. This particular advertising blitz makes me even angrier especially after the sanctimonious protestations about this very thing while in opposition.....hypocrites !

Commenter

Pauline

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 6:08AM

Yes its a shame that its only a priority to do the right thing when you are in opposition. Surely over the years we would have had one mob that was prepared to take a hit for the public good... guess not

Commenter

Dave

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 8:48AM

Napthine is clearly trying to buy the votes of those who don't realise his $8 billion tunnel is only going to shift the madness of Punt Rd to Flemington Rd.

Worse, he has failed to tell us why he has broken his election promises of 2010 to build the Doncaster rail link...

When will he man up and actually admit that there is no actually, professionally compiled business case and therefore whoever builds it is likely to go bankrupt and need a taxpayer bailout, because not enough Victorians are stupid enough to pay $25 a day to use his tollway.

Commenter

Peter

Location

Kensington

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 10:34AM

It seems to be one of the common themes of all Govt.'s, carry on about it when in opposition and then milk it in Govt. Both sides do it. Bit like pollie pay rises.

Atleast they aren't as cringeworthy as "Hi I'm Dan Andrews"....

Commenter

David

Location

OutEast

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 12:20PM

These advertisements are rubbish.

Napthine and the COALition will never build a railway line to the airport or the Metro Rail Tunnel.

Overwhelmingly Victorians want better public transport infrastructure instead of more toll roads and freeways but the government is doing the opposite. Why is this ?

The government are being secretive, dishonest and underhanded and Napthine and his cronies should face a judicial inquiry.

This project will turn out to be the biggest financial scam in Victoria's political history.

Superannuation fund managers are being urged to gamble billions of dollars of members' funds on buying and funding new toll roads such as the E-W toll road.Members should write to their super funds and warn the managers not to gamble their savings on this white elephant.

The $18 billion East-West toll road at a cost of about $1 billion per kilometre, has already failed a cost-benefit analysis commissioned by the previous government.

The only way this expensive project could be justified is to exaggerate or falsify the benefits.

The government's political donors and the road lobby groups are good at promoting these exaggerations because they are desperate to benefit financially. Of course the toll road operators want it because they can slug motorists over a million dollars a day in toll fees.

An international study has already found that for investors to get a return on the E-W toll road, motorists would have to be slugged a minimum of $12.50 per trip.

@Rail Now, oh yeah the Metro Rail Tunnel. Inner City Melbourne really needs more rail transport. Melbourne only has train lines to and from the city, and you want more. Not everybody works in the CBD. How about a plan for an outer suburban light rail system. For Example, from Dandenong to Ringwood, up Stud road, or another on Warrigal Rd. Connect the train lines so we don't have to go into the city and out again, just to get around. The Metro Rail Tunnel, is the most selfish concept around, and this would only increase the disparity between inner and outer Melbourne.

Commenter

Kingstondude

Location

Malaysia atm

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 3:19PM

@KDI completely agree with you on this one. The fact that we are forced to travel to the inner city to get anywhere else is a joke. The tunnel won change that.

Commenter

DrPhil

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 4:11PM

Kingstondudue this is a very weak attempt to muddy the debate. You know full well there is not anywhere near the comparative demand or net benefit between orbital and city suburb rail. Nor I suspect could you care less. I think the approach of LNP shills in trying to avoid debate or dissent on issues like this is very telling. Stand by your man.

Commenter

Derek

Location

From berwick

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 5:33PM

There must be someone on this forum from ad land that can give us an idea of how much a multi platform saturation campaign in a single state costs. I'm sure an estimate on the cost of this campaign would not be to hard to come by.Think it would make for a great follow up piece for the writer. Speak to one of the big buyers, get an estimate and smoke them out with a few articles.

Commenter

Derek

Location

From berwick

Date and time

August 16, 2014, 5:40PM

Every dollar this OneTermTed/DenisTheMenace Govt spends on advertising its false promises confirms how much we need to vote them out for sane govt in Victoria.